In one of the more volatile recent periods of racial unrest in this country, some of the most inflammatory incitement is coming from an odd little corner of academia.

An influential, tenured university psychology professor is on the airwaves claiming Trayvon Martin was a “thug,” a “hoodlum” and a drug dealer who was shot while he was suspended from high school after being caught with stolen jewelry and a tool used for “breaking and entering.” California State University, Long Beach, Professor Kevin MacDonald made these and other allegations about the slain teen on David Duke’s nationwide radio program yesterday morning.

MacDonald, who has appeared on the former Klansman’s daily radio show at least five times in the past four weeks, also claimed the “Jewish controlled” media is engaging in intentional “deception” about the unarmed 17-year-old African-American student who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watchman in Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26. The case has created a national uproar, with thousands of anti-racist demonstrators calling for the arrest of the watchman, George Zimmerman.

“If you look on the media accounts on television they have this photo of Trayvon Martin when he was 14 or 13,” MacDonald complained. “He looks like this little angelic kid. But that’s not the way he looks now. “

“When you see some recent pictures you know he’s much older,” MacDonald continued. “He’s got these, uh, gold-plated teeth, you know, these sort of bling they have, you know, which is sort of a marker of being involved in this sort of rap scene. You know, uh, there’s one photo on Facebook where he’s flashing gang signs and you can see his underwear, you know. He’s got his pants pulled way down. It’s just complete deception to present him as this little angel.”

But the media’s so-called “deception” actually may be MacDonald’s racist delusions. Indeed, most of the statements MacDonald made about Trayvon Martin on David Duke’s radio program yesterday are provably untrue.

Though we have been reporting on Kevin MacDonald’s anti-Semitic writings and racist advocacy for years, he has significantly ratcheted up his rhetoric online and in public appearances since the Martin slaying. In fact, MacDonald may now be in violation of several CSU faculty regulations.

While many racists have ridiculed the nationwide protests and demonstrations over the Martin shooting, the CSU professor has himself been out protesting. On Mon., Feb. 27, the day after the death of Trayvon Martin, MacDonald was photographed rubbing elbows with tattooed skinheads on the streets of Los Angeles. He and other racists were passing out flyers and protesting the so-called “genocide” of white farmers in South Africa.

MacDonald has also recently become active as a board member and director with the hate group American Third Position. Two weeks ago, he expressed anger at Republicans for failing to keep America a “majority-White [sic] country” in an essay entitled, “The Racialization of American Politics Continues.” He said that “since the Republican Party is incapable of saving itself by adopting policies that would keep America a majority-White country, the long term solution is a third party representing the interests of White America: American Third Position.”

But it’s the Trayvon Martin case that seems to have MacDonald particularly agitated. Last week, on his blog, theoccidentalobserver.net, MacDonald wrote an essay about the Martin case, essentially arguing that the media attention is part of a Jewish conspiracy creating a new “anti-White religion” with a deceptive “narrative of Blacks as innocent victims of Whites.”

“[I]t will be very interesting to see how this all plays out,” Macdonald wrote. “The message of the poor, defenseless Black kid buying Skittles is turning into the thug who was suspended because of drug use at his school and who went out of his way to attack Zimmerman and was pounding his head into the concrete.”

Whites can expect more media-encouraged violent attacks from blacks and other minorities in the future, MacDonald wrote, elaborating this theme in the comments section of the article on his website over the weekend. “Blacks are very aggressive and they feel empowered with one of their own as president and Eric Holder as Attorney General,” he said. “But what we see now is nothing compared to what we can expect in the future when violence against Whites will go unprosecuted, not just ignored by the media.”

An even harsher, more “unplugged” version of the CSU professor’s opinions have been expressed repeatedly on Duke’s radio program over the past few weeks. On March 26, MacDonald told Duke, “Certainly uh, uh, it is the case that, that, that white people have stereotypes of blacks as criminals but it reflects the reality that blacks are crim-,” he said, before catching himself and then saying that black people are “much more likely to be criminals.”

Though MacDonald has appeared on racist Internet radio programs for years he is sounding more angry and animated, almost unhinged, since the Martin shooting. On March 20, for example, Duke had to ask MacDonald to stop rustling papers on his desk during the show while, in a frenetic and agitated stream of rants, MacDonald made several crude statements about Jews.

Jews are secretly making alliances with blacks, Hispanics and Asians, MacDonald said. They’re “making these alliances with other groups and their long-term goal is to displace white power.” From there, MacDonald was on a roll. Agreeing with Duke that “we are all Palestinians now, aren’t we?” MacDonald went on to say that Jews were “super hyper ethnocentric” and “think of all non-Jews as basically sub-human.”

In the racist, neo-Nazi subculture, MacDonald has become a key intellectual with his study of “Jewish evolutionary strategy.” Duke opened up his March 20 radio broadcast by introducing MacDonald as “one of the men I most intellectually admire in the world. A man who I can safely say I learned more about the Jewish question [from] than any other single writer in my lifetime.” Duke was speaking the truth. Hatewatch readers may recall that most of the footnotes featured in Duke’s self-published book Jewish Supremacism appear to have been lifted verbatim from MacDonald’s notorious trilogy of books on “the Jewish question.”

MacDonald may be Duke’s greatest teacher. But it would appear that his extracurricular activities over the past month could be at odds with regulations governing his official teaching at CSU. Although he is a tenured professor, he still is a “public employee” of the university, subject to the CSU Free Speech Handbook, Section V, on “Public Employee Speech,” which specifically prohibits faculty members engaging in “opprobrious, flagrant, insulting, defamatory” speech.

CSU faculty members are also barred from engaging in “incompatible activities,” described as “of a type not befitting the professional dignity of a faculty member, or of a kind which would demean or degrade the individual or the institution.” They cannot engage in “discriminatory behavior, bullying or harassment,” defined as “offensive conduct of an unwelcome nature on the basis of any of the characteristics identified. A hostile environment exists when such conduct unreasonably interferes with an individual’s ability to participate, learn and/or work.”

I am 2nd generation Mexican-American and people tell me to get a tan bcs my skin is so “white.” I don’t follow the advice due to having had a small case of skin cancer. But my point is that of some other posts: “white” is difficult to define.
If Haters ever get together to round up and shoot Mexicans at the border, they might overlook me. If I speak, they will not hear an accent either. Yet, I feel all the hate and intolerance as if it is directed towards me (hate of ANY kind–toward African-Americans, anti-Semitic, etc). I stand with ANY group that is told to give up their traditions in order to assimilate.

Angie

Lol!! Yes, that username/pen name fits him very well!!

Reynardine

To be sure, when I was young enough to fry my hide, it was lower-albedo than a lot of people who aren’t “white”, and even now, just cultivating my farmset and walking to town makes me distinctly swarthier than a lot of less “white” people in Yankee land. On the other hand, winter in New York left me whiter than a box of Domino sugar cubes. Anders Breivik was tanner- a lot tanner. Okay, so back to defining “white”…

EarleyDaysYet

The WN thing never made sense to me. The reason there exists in the US a “proud to be black” meme makes perfect sense against the background of 100 post-Civil-War years of bullshit laws that reinforced negative stereotypes about black people. You think being white gives you no privilege? What utter tripe. Have YOU ever been followed as you walk around a store? Have YOU ever been pulled over by cops & immediately started a litany of “I’m not resisting, yes sir, whatever you say sir, of course you can search my car sir” to avoid being Tasered, Maced or shot? So many things, but if you choose to be blind, nothing I say will make any difference.

For the record: my parents were missionaries; I am Australian by birth but grew up (cross- and multi-culturally) in Papua New Guinea and the US. You think bigotry no longer exists just because it’s illegal? Wherever you live, and/or the inside of your head, must be a monocultural wasteland. Deeply committed Christian friends of ours in SC were *appalled” when our family started attending a black church; when we told them we’d eaten at a certain restaurant; when we stopped to help a stranded black motorist, when we had black friends In Our House!!

My dad’s family are all solidly, stolidly white, from England and Ireland. My mum’s family has English, Greek, German, Spanish & Jamaican. We are, by all physical appearance, white people who tan really well.

I have friends who identify culturally, and participate in cultural events pertaining thereto, Latvian, Ukrainian, Jamaican, Trinidadian… I used to be envious of them for having “a” cultural identifier, when mine consisted of “Australian. Sort of.” Although I have “white” (usually actually brownish) skin, I do not consider myself White, nor am I proud or otherwise of my skin colour – it simply is what it is.

Reynardine

What the Hell is a true culture, Hauser? Define one. How do you tell it from an untrue culture? Give us cogent parameters. How do you define a Jew? Give us your exact delimitation. As for blue-eyed blonds, I have no reason to suppose they are more or less given to criminality than any other group (Anders Breivik bleached his hair). And now, please…no, the mods will publish people like you, but they’re prudish, so further I say not.

Robert Hauser

I’ve got MacDonald’s back…the late Joe Sobran once observed that so called “multiculturalism” is nothing more a stubborn refusal to accept any true culture seriously. Whether anyone on this thread likes it or not, this nation was founded and made once great—which it is no longer—by European men of White gentile ancestry—-not by a horde of Barack Obamas and Trayvon Martins or Buttface Benjamin Bernankes and Lloyd Blankfines.
Whether any of you believe this or not, if it should turn out to be true that Zimmerman (who is half hispanic and by no means the blond haired blue-eyed Norseman the screaming mimi libs would so love to have had him be) did in fact stalk Martin and methodically gun him down the same way that Johannes Mehserle, the Oakland cop, senselessly shot Oscar grant in the back while he was lying face down on the BART platform and posing no threat whatsoever, I would want to see him hang for it as much as any of you. But I have yet to see evidence that this is anything remotely akin to the Oscar Grant murder. And until we are presented with proof beyond any reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty that it was in fact, and the maggotry of the droolingly judeophilic media just give us the facts—ALL of them— so we can decide for ourselves rather than letting them do out thinking, this will only become more of a tumor in our lives.
Perhaps Trayvon was a gangbanger and local punk hood—it is not as if such were flatly impossible—and perhaps he was a Norman Rockwell choir-boy, or perhaps a spectrum of things intermediate. Let us have the damned truth if that not be a demand too cramping of the style of the jewish fog machine press.

Ken B

I support the principal of free speech and the right to express unpopular minority opinions. But does this liberty have moral boundries? Mark Potok asserts that Dr. MacDonald made a series of “provably untrue” accusations against Trayvon Martin. Were they untrue? If so, why did he make them? I would judge that to be remarkably careless for a disciplined academic. Are Dr. MacDonald’s defenders avoiding addressing his apparently spurious accusations?

Reynardine

The correct term, dear Wentra, is either panty-waisted (referring to an obsolete garment worn by Victorian children) or pansy (a large shrinking violet). Neither one goes with “pushy”, but I doubt you are any more capable of a consistent literary style than you are of cogent thought.

Wentra

I wish I had, had some professors like this in college who present an opposing viewpoint to the overly-pushy and pansywaisted ultraliberals who cannot stand anyone they cannot brainwash.

Jared Pierce

It does my soul good to see more and more people stand up to the intolerance found at SPLC. I think the more you call people racist, and the more you try to punish freedom of speech, the more you are going to push people over to what you call the “radical right”. SPLC is the inquisitor of the twenty first century. Race realists are the heretics. In the long run, our opinions will prevail. I can almost guarrentee it!

Reynardine

Note: Android autocorrect functions produced some anomalies in the foregoing, but at least not a perorating pastry.

Reynardine

The subject of William Pierce is curiously interesting. I read “The Turner Diaries in 1987, and, in pursuit of a subject I was researching, again ten years later. On the latter occasion, I passed it along to my co-author, a former New York City cop who was born in Puerto Rico. “This has to be a put-on!” Was his reaction. Alas, no, but it’s easy to see why he thought so: there is not only no subtlety about it, but it is such a gross exaggeration of even the most bigoted stereotypes that it is hard to believe anyone could take it seriously. Turner’s strategic impersonation by a Jew would be seen through by anyone over eight in the first thirty seconds, for example, yet in the novel, he gets away with it. Yet this work was taken seriously enough by Timothy McVeigh, for instance, to…

I had never heard of “Hunter” until Ruslan cited it. The only work of that name I knew of was a rather hokey “autobiography” by an alleged big-game hunter popularized in the early Fifties. I looked up a synopsis, however. In my view, this book is far more dangerous, because it can inspire any lone wolf; it has evidently inspired many lone wolves; it may have inspired the killer of Trayvon Martin.

Really, Ruslan, I never thought of Mr. Pierce getting married at all, because I really did not wish to picture him engaging in sexual reproduction. It’s interesting, though, that he should have selected Hungarian women for his later endeavors (as I might have featured, they didn’t stay long). Hungarians are pretty up front about their Central Asian ancestry. They were, even in WW II. Yet if consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds, even such a little hobgoblin evidently could not fit within the dimensions of Mr. Pierce’s cranium.

Andrea Muhrrteyn

According to my definition of ‘racism’ (Dr. Gedaliah Braun: What is Racism; or How Philsophy can be Practical); I have never come across anything Dr. MacDonald said that was remotely ‘racist’. He has always been willing to enter into discussion providing his evidence for his arguments, and to change his mind on any conclusion, should he be provided evidence to the contrary.

The SPLC however have and continue to be extremely bigotted towards any ideas they disagree with, and refuse to provide their evidence or arguments or to enter into a civil rational impartial enquiry into the issue. They prefer to be judge, jury and executioner, without providing the accused any opportunity to submit the evidence of their defense. This indicates to me at least, that the SPLC — at least where it comes to Dr. MacDonald — do not have honourable ethical intentions, but that they are using the fake smear of ‘racism’ to defame Dr. MacDonald.

Ruslan Amirkhanov

“Clearly they do – there are millions of people walking around at this very moment who would happily identify themselves as white.”

Nope, most of these people will identify themselves by nationality first, and most of those who call themselves white live in the US, Canada, Australia, etc. A European would rarely identify themselves as “white”, and North Africans, Arabs, Turks, and Persians are extremely unlikely to use such an identifier.

” Is it your life’s mission to somehow convince them they aren’t? What an odd little crusade you’re on. Just out of curiosity, does this crusade include telling black people they’re not black or telling asians they’re not asian?”

“White” denotes appearance, it is not a nationality. There is no such thing as “white” culture or a “white” nation. As for black Americans, unlike the Irish, Italians, etc. they did not willingly give up their own identity(after all they could never assimilate and become “white”). They are “black” because they don’t have the luxury of being able to point out what particular African country their ancestors came from. As for “Asians”, it is clear that you have an Americentric view of the world, because Asia is a pretty big place. “Asians” run the gamut from European to Mongolic, Tungusgic, etc.

“I said it before but I’ll say it again, in my experience when a group is trying to deny the existence of another group it is usually for worst reasons, starting with being a cheap, low way to not listen to the arguments the other side is making and continuing towards complete denial of the group’s humanity, indeed as a prelude to overt political repression.”

Ridiculous.

“So, I’m not sure where you’re going with this “white people don’t exist” thing of yours, but when I compare it to other examples I’ve seen of similar rhetorical moves, it doesn’t reflect well on whatever it is you’re up to.”

There’s an easy way to clear this up. Just tell us who “white people” are and explain their culture, language, etc.

“Okay, go ahead, let’s see your stats on job discrimination, racial profiling, lending discrimination, and portrayal in the media. Most of those are predictable but the media one strikes me odd. Minorities have never been more often portrayed or better portrayed in the media than they are now. Black music IS the dominant form of pop music these days. Curious what you’re going to complain about there.”

This is a fairly representative study; in some studies black applicants with no criminal record and equal or higher qualifications are not called back while white applicants with criminal records receive calls: http://www.epi.org/publication....._09172003/

“So whites are privileged because of past racial injustice? I suppose this is privilege in a “gee, you’re lucky” sort of sense, but it’s not privilege in the sense of “hey, you’ve got something I should have right now too.” That is, unless you’re proposing forced re-distribution of wealth. Good luck with that.”

Historical privilege is only part of white privilege. This is not too hard to understand(well, maybe for you it is). If someone is told to run a race with weights attached to their legs, obviously their opponent is going to run far ahead of them. Now if one day we take the weights off, does this make the race fair? Of course not.

“When something is made illegal there is indeed almost always a big societal effect. i don’t think there’s much doubt that if guns were made illegal there would be a lot less gun violence. And I think there’s little doubt that if drugs were made legal there would be a lot more drug use.”

There is a hell of a lot of drug use now, including in places like prison where every aspect of life is severely restricted. The efficacy of a law is often related to how easy it is to enforce.

” So to say that making discrimination illegal hasn’t made any difference is just strange. I don’t think you are going to find many serious thinkers who would agree with you that making discrimination illegal hasn’t made a big difference in the US. Given this, you’re basing your concept of “white privilege” on types of discrimination that have been severely curtailed over the past 40 years. This is why I call your argument old and tired.”

Yeah, that’s why drug use is almost unheard of in the US, because of the war on drugs which has gone on for more than 40 years.

http://twitter.com/AronL Aron

Rey,

Why would anyone impugn an opponent in a political debate for the simple fact that they are a furrier? People desire mink coats, and furriers provide them that product!

Har har!

Attila

Truth-speakers and challengers of orthodoxy (leftist or PC or any other kind) have never been popular.

Your little article is a recommendation of sorts.

Thank you and Chag Pesakh Sameakh.

Ruslan Amirkhanov

For the record, I’m American, and also by American social standards unquestionably “white”, gentile. Sorry White Nationalists.

Anyway, I think it’s always funny do watch the WN monkeys praise their “intellectual gods” like William “Pervert” Pierce and Kevin MacDonald. I won’t count Duke because Duke doesn’t do his own writing or research, and anyone who is close to Duke knows this. The thing is that if you can string together two paragraphs without writing some racial slur, you become a WN intellectual. And yet for all the touting of MacDonald’s credentials, a great deal of MacDonald’s theory is based on history, which is not his field. It is there that his theory falls apart.

As for Duke, he’s the guy that makes me pity you poor WN. I mean this guy’s been running all over Europe with YOUR money. He spends 5 years in Russia and Ukraine and can’t read Cyrillic. What do you think he was doing with your money? There are plenty of people WITHIN your movement who will tell you that Duke is a fraud and a con-man. And you’re stupid enough to keep sucking up to him. Man, I should’ve been a WN “intellectual”, I’d never have to do any real work.

Red

@Reyanrdine

I agree, Ruslan’s English seems perfectly okay to me. Not sure where you got the idea that I think his English is bad, but let me assure you I think it’s just fine. Your English seems great too while we’re at it. Anything else you’re concerned about that I can help you with?

Red

@Ruslan Amirkhanov

“…Just pick a subject and we’ll look at the data…”

Okay, go ahead, let’s see your stats on job discrimination, racial profiling, lending discrimination, and portrayal in the media. Most of those are predictable but the media one strikes me odd. Minorities have never been more often portrayed or better portrayed in the media than they are now. Black music IS the dominant form of pop music these days. Curious what you’re going to complain about there.

“…we could look at how the US government favored whites in the past at the expense of blacks, and see how this created a massive white middle class…”

So whites are privileged because of past racial injustice? I suppose this is privilege in a “gee, you’re lucky” sort of sense, but it’s not privilege in the sense of “hey, you’ve got something I should have right now too.” That is, unless you’re proposing forced re-distribution of wealth. Good luck with that.

“…because when things are made illegal, even when the laws are near impossible to enforce…”

When something is made illegal there is indeed almost always a big societal effect. i don’t think there’s much doubt that if guns were made illegal there would be a lot less gun violence. And I think there’s little doubt that if drugs were made legal there would be a lot more drug use. So to say that making discrimination illegal hasn’t made any difference is just strange. I don’t think you are going to find many serious thinkers who would agree with you that making discrimination illegal hasn’t made a big difference in the US. Given this, you’re basing your concept of “white privilege” on types of discrimination that have been severely curtailed over the past 40 years. This is why I call your argument old and tired.

That’s all for now. I’m going to resist the temptation to go on a childish “you fail” “you’re a big plate of fail” fest. You seem like a decent enough person aside from the creepy “white people don’t exist” thing.

Red

@Ruslan Amirkhanov

“According to the government, “white” means people of European, Middle Eastern, or North African descent.”

Okay, so what? Is there some sort of problem with this? What is your obsession with proving that white people don’t exist? Clearly they do – there are millions of people walking around at this very moment who would happily identify themselves as white. Is it your life’s mission to somehow convince them they aren’t? What an odd little crusade you’re on. Just out of curiosity, does this crusade include telling black people they’re not black or telling asians they’re not asian?

I said it before but I’ll say it again, in my experience when a group is trying to deny the existence of another group it is usually for worst reasons, starting with being a cheap, low way to not listen to the arguments the other side is making and continuing towards complete denial of the group’s humanity, indeed as a prelude to overt political repression.

So, I’m not sure where you’re going with this “white people don’t exist” thing of yours, but when I compare it to other examples I’ve seen of similar rhetorical moves, it doesn’t reflect well on whatever it is you’re up to.

Reynardine

Red, as a former English examiner, I can state that Mr. Amirkhanov’s English is the kind used by well- read native speakers from North America, even though I don’t have enough material in front of me to distinguish U.S. from Canadian isographs. There is, however, no sound reason for you to make snide allusions to whatever you imagine his ethnic background is, especially since he hasn’t asserted it as any grounds for either special knowledge or superiority.

Usually people who say things like that are impugning either someone’s bona fides or their knowledge on the grounds that their opponant is a Muslim, a Jew, a furriner, or all three, and therefore to be discounted, regardless of the truth of their assertions. It’s a cretinous tactic, and one that wastes the time of serious participants in a discussion.

Reynardine

As long ago as Lao-Tze, China was becoming “the Great Land” by taking in other groups and assimilating them. Even now, the groups you can find in China include Manchu, Uighur, Tibetan, and Miao; there is a very noticeable physical and linguistic difference even among Han from Southern and Northern China, and many of those now identified as Han historically came from diverse groups since subsumed. Ethnic Japanese, Koreans, Annamese, and Laotians live in China. But of course, to a certain mentality, “they all look alike”.

Leslie

Aussie wrote: “Why do you think that China is flourishong, Japan is still strong despite some very unfortunate disasters, and multicultural America is floundering??? Here is a hint – Japan and China are filled with people who are very similar to each other.”

Having spent time in Japan I know that the Japanese are not similar to each other. There are notable differences in culture, education, class, and values among the Japanese; especially between those who live in the big cities and the countryside. There are also several large minority groups, i.e. Koreans, and other immigrant communities as well as American ex-pats. But, what the Japanese do have is a decent safety net that helps with their resilience under distressing circumstances. Their health care is affordable, so those people exposed to radiation in a nuclear power plant will not have to declare bankruptcy. No one in Japan declares bankruptcy because of an illness.

Ruslan Amirkhanov

Right on time we get another delivery of stupid.

Let’s start with “Lux.”

“Some people are really funny here, all of a sudden they ask “what is a white race?”. “what is european culture?”, “what is western civilization?”

Yes Lux, we ask those questions. Let’s hear some answers.

Deep Ecology

No published reviews from students in Rate My Professor that hint of any bias or racism, apparently a pretty boring lecturer, medium class load, mostly approachable and helpful during office hours, sometimes goes off on a tangent in class and favors his own published theories of child psychology over others. Ok, so professionally not a problem.

Peer review of research mostly favorable, and not much controversy generated from first two books about Jewish in-group identity and intelligence, last one though seemed to have hit a nerve and produced some vociferous opposition.

It does appear that groups in opposition to Zionism and Jewish influence use his works as scholarly ammunition to buttress their arguments.

The Right seems passionately divided on the Jewish question. I am a fellow travelor with much of New Right thought but more in the radical traditionalist school and Deep Ecology. That being said, I am a supporter of Israel and the existence of Jewish state. It is only through self-determination and nationhood that Jews can protect themselves from the consequences of historical anti-semitism. And yes, I know this came at the expense of Palestinian lands and self-determination. It is rare for there to be a win-win scenario when it comes to this kind of clear cut blood, soil and religion conflict.

Reynardine

Red, I requested that you not be specious.

JimRogers

“so-called genocide”

You would say that.No one likes to be responsible for pushing worldwide genocide!

Sam Molloy

If race does not matter and the government is colorblind why do they ask your “race” on the census, surveys about their websites, and on job applications for government statistics? The last is always “voluntary”… Ever say you don’t want to answer and get that job? We have a long way to go.

“So, despite Potok’s rant, I plead not guilty to charges of “engaging in ‘opprobrious, flagrant, insulting, defamatory’ speech.” Not that that will stop him and his many allies. If anyone should sue for defamation, it’s me.”

Jason

Ok, thanks to SPLC for alerting me to David Duke’s program and the interview with Professor MacDonald. I just listened to the show, and I think it was pretty good. Both Duke & MacDonald are entertaining, informative, and erudite. I like the bumper music Duke uses too. I was surprised that Duke actually has advertisers that sponsor his show. Good deal!